![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Russia has set some approximate dates for Kliper's first flight:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rocketscience-05zz.html They also hinting at international co-operation. The timeline is roughly the same as CEV. How do you think this will play out? Considering that Kliper is already in a mock-up stage and CEV is still in powerpoint mode, do you think there will be pressure for NASA to use Kliper instead of CEV? Likewise, will the RSA use CEV instead of Kliper like they did with Shuttle/Buran? Comments anyone? Gene DiGennaro Baltimore, Md. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Anybody (well, nearly...) can build a metal scale 1 model for $ 1
million. Building a $5 billion spacecraft is another story. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You and I both know that but what about the congresscritters?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... Anybody (well, nearly...) can build a metal scale 1 model for $ 1 million. Building a $5 billion spacecraft is another story. A proper spacecraft like Kliper ought not to cost $5 billion to develop. Jeff -- Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... Russia has set some approximate dates for Kliper's first flight: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rocketscience-05zz.html They also hinting at international co-operation. The timeline is roughly the same as CEV. How do you think this will play out? Considering that Kliper is already in a mock-up stage and CEV is still in powerpoint mode, do you think there will be pressure for NASA to use Kliper instead of CEV? Likewise, will the RSA use CEV instead of Kliper like they did with Shuttle/Buran? Comments anyone? No bucks, no Buck Rogers. I'd say if they can attract foreign partners, which shouldn't be too hard since it looks like the US is going to back out of as much of its ISS commitments as it can, they ought to be able to build it. If they could get ESA and Japan on board, I think they could get the funding they need to develop the ship. What's in it for ESA and Japan? They could increase the crew size on ISS without the CRV that the US promised to deliver. Without an increased crew size (beyond three, I think it's unlikely that ESA and Japan will be able to send anyone to ISS, except for the occasional short term visit on a Soyuz rotation. Without a more permanent presence on ISS, their investment in ISS will never "pay off". The only potential problem would be working out the agreements so that ESA and Japan can minimize the cash they send to Russia. If they could provide hardware, perhaps even launches, instead of cash, I think they would be more likely to join with Russia. After all, NASA looks like it's going to develop yet another launch vehicle and spacecraft on its own, which leaves ESA and Japan as "second class citizens" in space. Jeff -- Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 16:21:12 -0400, "Jeff Findley"
wrote: wrote in message roups.com... Russia has set some approximate dates for Kliper's first flight: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rocketscience-05zz.html They also hinting at international co-operation. The timeline is roughly the same as CEV. How do you think this will play out? Considering that Kliper is already in a mock-up stage and CEV is still in powerpoint mode, do you think there will be pressure for NASA to use Kliper instead of CEV? Likewise, will the RSA use CEV instead of Kliper like they did with Shuttle/Buran? Comments anyone? No bucks, no Buck Rogers. I'd say if they can attract foreign partners, The EU and Russians intend to pay for it. which shouldn't be too hard since it looks like the US is going to back out of as much of its ISS commitments as it can, I am not sure what way to take this comment. NASA certainly won't fund the Klipper (or "Clipper" as they now like to call it) for at least two reasons. NASA killing ISS obligations could create quite a fuss though. NASA is not planning to break those commitments yet anyway. They are just currently too hopeless to shift them at a suitable rate. I suspect that they could improve when they ditch these safety notions and go back to trying to launch on schedule. they ought to be able to build it. The EU and Russia has already approved funding, which is why the expected launch year has now been set. If they could get ESA and Japan on board, ESA is already on board. They approved large scale funding on Klipper last month. The Russian government then approved funding so that it became a joint project. I am not sure if any other country will chip in. This is mostly just one more step as the EU and Russian space organizations come very close to complete merger. As I said before this is a good deal for both sides. The EU gets the Russian experience and a cheapish manned space programme, while the Russians get the funding to do all the stuff that they wanted to do ever since the USSR came to an end and terminated most of their funding. I think they could get the funding they need to develop the ship. They already have it. Pending the political paperwork of course. Klipper is a go. Unmanned flight in 2011, and manned in 2012. What's in it for ESA and Japan? ESA has always wanted a manned space programme. For some reason that idea just never got off the ground. Even their Ariane 5 rocket was being planned to launch their craft. Considering NASA's Moon and beyond programme, then the EU has felt a pressing need to keep up with the Americans. The Russians have been wanting to do Klipper for quite a few years now, but only this large EU funding is now causing this project to go ahead. That reason is exactly why the Russians already have a test model to show off. They have been in a wishful state for a long time, where following this go ahead, they have just now pulled out what they have been playing with for the past few years. I have no idea what the Japanese want to do. Their entire launch and probe business seems to currently be in a questionable state. Too many failures in other words. They could increase the crew size on ISS without the CRV that the US promised to deliver. Since the Klipper is a six-person craft, then it seems ideal for a ISS lifeboat. NASA had been wanting to do a 7-person version, but even increasing the ISS crew to 6 would provide huge research gains. Without an increased crew size (beyond three, I think it's unlikely that ESA and Japan will be able to send anyone to ISS, except for the occasional short term visit on a Soyuz rotation. Well in the planned 7 person ISS, then they could have had nearly a full time crew member. Since NASA is wanting to reduce ISS commitments, then it is possible that the EU/Russians can take over. The main problem in increasing the crew numbers on the ISS is that NASA has not yet launched the required modules, like with the main crew sleeping area. They only have one of their large solar panels up there, meaning limited power. And I suspect that life support is not quite ready for 7 people either. Without a more permanent presence on ISS, their investment in ISS will never "pay off". NASA is already very many years behind schedule. Even if they did manage regular launches (miracle...), then they still won't come close to completing the ISS. So either billions of dollars worth of modules get left on the ground, or an alternate launch and installation system will have to be found. The only potential problem would be working out the agreements so that ESA and Japan can minimize the cash they send to Russia. The EU seems more than happy to put large funding into this Russian project. After all they desire a spacecraft right now, where the Russians are just about offering to build them one. Joint EU/Russian launches should be quite common in the future. If they could provide hardware, perhaps even launches, instead of cash, I think they would be more likely to join with Russia. The EU's ESA is already joined as joined can be. The Russian space agency got interested in EU funding when the Russian government was bleeding them dry. This is just the latest project in a long line of EU funding into the Russian space agency. Another example is that the Russians are to soon move their launches to the ESA launch complex in French Guiana. The Russians get a brand new EU paid for launch pad, and a great launch location. The ESA can then make better use of launches on Russian rockets. So I would not be surprised if they come very close to merger in the future. After all, NASA looks like it's going to develop yet another launch vehicle and spacecraft on its own, which leaves ESA and Japan as "second class citizens" in space. The Russians have been doing well enough for a long time. This is just a good point for funding into new and better hardware. Cardman. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The executive of ESA has signed some paperwork with the Russians, but
as far as i know there has been no approval of any European Government for this adventure. Obviously the executive of ESA is trying to twist the arm of its member Governments in view of the Ministerial Conference of this year, to get them into financing klipper, but so far any commitment of the executive is without money and therefore without value. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Użytkownik Cardman napisał:
On 18 Aug 2005 15:22:24 -0700, wrote: The executive of ESA has signed some paperwork with the Russians, but as far as i know there has been no approval of any European Government for this adventure. Well what I recall on this matter is that just before the 1st of this month I read some news that clearly stated that this matter went before the European Parliament and they voted to approve funding on this project. Could you please show the reference article? ESA, as eager as it is to join Kliper programme would certainly hailed such event, but there's no mention about it in their news archive. I can't see it on spacedaily either, and a quick google search shows no such event. Regards, NE |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|